Spencer is the OMS???

Discuss the last days, Zion, second coming, emergency preparedness, alternative health, etc.
User avatar
AI2.0
captain of 1,000
Posts: 3917

Re: Spencer is the OMS???

Post by AI2.0 »

LDS Anarchist wrote: February 5th, 2018, 4:30 pm
AI2.0 wrote: February 3rd, 2018, 4:57 pm You won't say that the church is in apostasy, but you do say it is out of order. I'm not sure what the difference is, but I suppose you see it.
I have explained the difference in that exceedingly plain blog post I wrote and linked to. You either never read it or are pretending to misunderstand my words, as usual.
AI2.0 wrote: February 3rd, 2018, 4:57 pm You say that our Prophet and apostles are not prophets, only that we've sustained them as such.
Here's a quote from an interview that Gordon B. Hinckley did:
Q: You are the president, prophet, seer and revelator of the Mormon Church?

A: I am so sustained, yes. (Laughter)
This is really basic stuff, AI2.0. I'm not giving an advanced gospel topic when I talk of these things, so either you are a gospel novice, even a newbie convert, or you are long-time, maybe even lifetime-long member who hasn't done her homework. Either way, you are a novice. Or, you are just pretending to not understand my words, which is actually worse than being a novice. Everyone knows that there is a spiritual endowment that attends every calling. You enter the calling and office, you get the endowment. You are released from the calling, you lose the endowment that attends that office or calling. President Hinckley wasn't a natural prophet. He was a sustained prophet. An office prophet. He was called to the office and sustained. If he had not been sustained, he would have been removed from office. But as long as he held that office and calling, and was continually sustained, he had access to the spiritual endowment that comes with that particular office and calling. A natural prophet is one who has the gift to prophesy, whose gift isn't attached to any particular office or calling. They prophesy by that gift whether they are in an office, or out of the office. They do not lose their spiritual endowment because it's not tied to any particular office or calling. I can be considered a natural prophet, as can others who have the gift to prophesy, but President Hinckley was careful to make it clear he was't a natural prophet, but a sustained prophet. Now go ahead and pretend to misunderstand these plain words, yet again.
AI2.0 wrote: February 3rd, 2018, 4:57 pm In this church, we don't make this kind of distinction which you are making. Our prophets today are as much prophets as Moses or Abraham. They aren't just 'office' prophets. We are expected to look to our prophets, the same as the people in ancient days looked to their prophets. This is an example of where I consider the revelation you are apparently receiving to be false.
In this church we actually do make this distinction I am making, but we don't use the terms "natural prophet" and "sustained prophet" or "office prophet" because nobody (until I came along) has used these words to identify and label the distinctions. I have the gift of the word of knowledge, which gift is used to bring forth new information. It isn't used to re-hash the same tired and worn out topics and understandings over and over again. If you want re-hash, look at virtually every thread on this forum. See anything new nobody's ever seen before? Nope. It's all re-hash, except where I'm concerned. Okay, so you choke on new stuff, but you know what? I don't really care. I will continue to put out new stuff for as long as I have this gift, the world be damned. The gift of the word of knowledge pops out new true things and speaks them in plainness, often in ways that nobody ever thought of before. You will either learn to swallow the truth and let it expand your mind, or you can continue to choke on it, calling these things false, but you will be the one fighting against truth.

Moses was a natural seer. Abraham was a natural seer. Joseph Smith was a natural seer. And Jesus Christ was a natural Prophet. Jesus wasn't part of the "church hierarchy." The high priests of his time, and the scribes and Pharisees, who ruled the synagogues, were against Him, yet they were in Moses's seat.
Then spake Jesus to the multitude and to his disciples, saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat. All, therefore, whatsoever they bid you observe, they will make you observe and do; for they are ministers of the law, and they make themselves your judges. But do not ye after their works; for they say, and do not. For they bind heavy burdens and lay on men's shoulders, and they are grievous to be borne; but they will not move them with one of their fingers. And all their works they do to be seen of men. They make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments, and love the uppermost rooms at feasts, and the chief seats in the synagogues, and greetings in the markets, and to be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi (which is master). But be not ye called Rabbi; for one is your master, which is Christ; and all ye are brethren. (JST Matt. 23:1-5)
Jesus, then, wasn't an office Prophet. He was a natural Prophet. However, Joseph Smith was inspired to re-create "Moses's seat," so that now we have all the various offices of the priesthood and all the various callings. In other words, now we have office prophets and office seers, etc. But they are not the same or equated with the natural seers of Moses and others. The Josephite will be the second natural seer the saints will see. Joseph Smith was the first natural seer, and then afterward we got office seers and prophets, etc. But it was always in the plan of God to send at some point the second seer, that is, the second natural seer, who will be Joseph-Nephi, only this time it won't be a simple seer like Joseph Smith, but a miracle-working seer. Now, I'm teaching this in plainness to you, but I expect that you'll try to twist my words, nonetheless.
AI2.0 wrote: February 3rd, 2018, 4:57 pm You use Moses coming to the 'Elders' and you also describe the 'Josephite' making a show of his 'power' before the LDS prophets. How is that not similar to Moses before Pharoah's court? You even say 'the Josephite will go to the leadership of the church (per the Moses pattern) and demonstrate the power of God to them'. Demonstrate is what Moses did in Pharoah's court. As I pointed out, he didn't go to the 'elders' as in the leadership of a church, because there wasn't an established church among the enslaved Israelites. Moses was the one who set that up.
Demonstrate is what Moses did to the elders of Israel, which scripture I quoted in its entirety to you. But you continue to twist the narrative I gave to you, trying to insert a Pharaoh's court narrative. I am not going to explain to you about the tribal order in place during Moses's time. It will go entirely over your head and it will be a waste of my time for me to expound it, for your mind will not understand it and will try to twist it into something I didn't say. I perceive that you are in a Cathy Newman track of mind, in which you are looking for trigger words to use to transform my narrative into something I am not saying. So, continue thinking the nonsense you are thinking. I am content to have you continue to be confused about these things.
AI2.0 wrote: February 3rd, 2018, 4:57 pm I'm not twisting your words, I'm taking them at face value. You said this:
I have repeatedly said, AI2.0, that the Josephite will go to the leadership of the church (per the Moses pattern) and demonstrate the power of God to them, so that they will know that he is "the one mighty and strong" that was prophesied to appear, and then they will give to him their keys, so that he will have all the keys and authority and power needed to accomplish his mission. Now, that might make you uncomfortable, but who cares? It is a simple fact that the Lord cannot use the leadership of the church to accomplish His great and marvelous work and the restoration of all things, despite their keys. It takes a special person, whose faith is orders of magnitude greater than the faith of everyone else, to restore all things. The leadership of this church doesn't have enough faith to accomplish the task. Not even combined. Not even the combined faith of the whole church is enough. Joseph-Nephi's faith will dwarf everything combined, but he still needs those keys in order to be fully authorized. Thus, he will go to the leadership and demand that they give him the keys. (His mission is of paramount importance, therefore there will be no pussy-footing around.) And if they resist him, he will unleash so many miracles, and put forth a display of so much power, that those old men in Salt Lake City will need to change their Depends afterward. And they will all bow down before him and submit to his authority, just as people kiss today the ring of the Catholic bishops.
These are your words, Anarchy, I didn't make them up.
No, AI2.0, you continue to twist my words at every turn. You take nothing I write at face value. And as for that quote, there is nothing in that quote which is false. It is doctrinally sound, it has scriptural precedent and it also happens to be true. You are offended that I called old men, "old men," which happens to be a true statement, and that I intimated that these old men were wearing Depends, which old men often do. This triggered you, so that you can't digest the true information in the quotation. I am content to leave you in your triggered state, and not attempt to teach you any more, because it impossible to get anything into a triggered and closed mind.
AI2.0 wrote: February 3rd, 2018, 4:57 pm I disagree. Please read your description above and tell me you aren't suggesting that your Josephite comes and takes control, putting the church leadership out of the administration of this church?
There is not even the slightest suggestion of any such thing in the above quote, but your mind is so blinded that you imagine seeing the words on the screen, even though they are not there. Show the words to anyone and they will tell you that your mind is playing tricks on you, that you are imagining things. Your mind is blind like the minds of the people of Ammonihah were blind, where they imagined that Amulek spoke against their law, when he in actuality did not:
And now it came to pass that the people were more angry with Amulek, and they cried out, saying: This man doth revile against our laws which are just, and our wise lawyers whom we have selected. But Amulek stretched forth his hand, and cried the mightier unto them, saying: O ye wicked and perverse generation, why hath Satan got such great hold upon your hearts? Why will ye yield yourselves unto him that he may have power over you, to blind your eyes, that ye will not understand the words which are spoken, according to their truth? For behold, have I testified against your law? Ye do not understand; ye say that I have spoken against your law; but I have not, but I have spoken in favor of your law, to your condemnation. Alma 10:24-26)
AI2.0 wrote: February 3rd, 2018, 4:57 pm I pointed out that your description is one of 'removing' the church leaders, if they don't cooperate. And your powers of discernment are way off if you think I'm someone named 'Cathy Newman'.
If you think that I think you are someone named Cathy Newman, then I'm afraid I'm not the one with discernment issues.

I don't pretend to be a prophet. I don't pretend to know everything about the gospel or the mysteries. I don't pretend to be anything but a member of the CofJCofLDS. But, I can honestly answer this Temple Recommend question with a 'yes'.
4 Do you sustain the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as the Prophet, Seer, and Revelator and as the only person on the earth who possesses and is authorized to exercise all priesthood keys? Do you sustain members of the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles as prophets, seers, and revelators? Do you sustain the other General Authorities and local authorities of the Church?
I don't make a distinction between an 'office' and a 'natural' prophet because that is not what the Lord desires of us. I know through the teachings of the gospel and the scriptures that he wants me to heed the prophets' counsel and that Prophet is Pres. Nelson. He is old, he's 93, but I still speak of him with respect. I don't make fun of him for being an old man who, I'm sure, struggles with the physical problems of old age. You are offensive, dismissive and rude in your attitude toward my prophet and the apostles and I for one, don't appreciate it.

Your desire and zealous looking forward to some young superhero to 'demand' the keys from the LDS prophet is so out of place for a faithful LDS church member, I simply don't know what to make of you, and in all honesty, I'm don't believe I want to know any more about you or read anymore of your writings or your beliefs.

I also don't see the point of discussing with you further when I quote your own words and you still accuse me of twisting them. I know when a discussion is futile.

You have your 'revelations' and your own grandiose views of your revelatory powers. I leave you to yourself, and trust that in the end, truth will prevail.

User avatar
abijah
pleb in zion
Posts: 2577

Re: Spencer is the OMS???

Post by abijah »

alaris wrote: February 5th, 2018, 5:28 pm
I believe Malachi 3 is about the Davidic Servant. The "Lord" whom ye seek is not LORD as in YHWH but Lord as in sire. Saith the LORD of hosts at the end of verse 1 is the LORD as in YHWH. The messenger of the covenant - what covenant? The covenant to gather Israel. When he gathers Israel, he will purify the sons of Levi that they may offer unto the Lord an offering in righteousness. Judah can do a big fat nothing if their temple were built without the tribe of Levi present.

I am aware of the Ezekiel prophesies you mention, though would he need the Levitical birthright to offer a sacrifice? Might the sacrifice mean he has brought Levi with him? I'll have to reread Ezekiel :)
I also believe Malachi 3 is in reference to the davidic servant. The return of the levitical priesthood in Israel will be an important part of the restoration of all things and only the birthright descendant of aaron may bring this about, since he is him which has that priesthood by natural descent. In this sense it's not just absorbed into what we call the Melchizedek priesthood.

The Ezekiel chapters talk about his performance of sacrifices and his portion as both priest and king. All this connotes a heritage in the tribe of Levi, which perhaps in part harks back to the "one mighty and strong" verses in doctrine and covenants 85 since the Church Bishop is the Church's temporary substitute for a bonafide son of Aaron.

User avatar
Craig Johnson
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1991
Location: Washington State.

Re: Spencer is the OMS???

Post by Craig Johnson »

Dear KingZulqarnayn, here is criteria for you from President Joseph F. Smith, the son of Hyrum Smith and the Prophet Joseph Smith's nephew: "...the "one mighty and strong" will be called and accepted when the time comes for his services." Badaboom badabing.

User avatar
Alaris
Captain of 144,000
Posts: 7354
Location: Present before the general assembly
Contact:

Re: Spencer is the OMS???

Post by Alaris »

abijah wrote: February 5th, 2018, 5:53 pm
alaris wrote: February 5th, 2018, 5:28 pm
I believe Malachi 3 is about the Davidic Servant. The "Lord" whom ye seek is not LORD as in YHWH but Lord as in sire. Saith the LORD of hosts at the end of verse 1 is the LORD as in YHWH. The messenger of the covenant - what covenant? The covenant to gather Israel. When he gathers Israel, he will purify the sons of Levi that they may offer unto the Lord an offering in righteousness. Judah can do a big fat nothing if their temple were built without the tribe of Levi present.

I am aware of the Ezekiel prophesies you mention, though would he need the Levitical birthright to offer a sacrifice? Might the sacrifice mean he has brought Levi with him? I'll have to reread Ezekiel :)
I also believe Malachi 3 is in reference to the davidic servant. The return of the levitical priesthood in Israel will be an important part of the restoration of all things and only the birthright descendant of aaron may bring this about, since he is him which has that priesthood by natural descent. In this sense it's not just absorbed into what we call the Melchizedek priesthood.

The Ezekiel chapters talk about his performance of sacrifices and his portion as both priest and king. All this connotes a heritage in the tribe of Levi, which perhaps in part harks back to the "one mighty and strong" verses in doctrine and covenants 85 since the Church Bishop is the Church's temporary substitute for a bonafide son of Aaron.
Well if I am correct about the temporal salvation aspect of the Davidic Servant, then that certainly is symbolized by the Priesthoods.

Elohim - Spiritual Father
Jehovah - Spiritual Savior
Adam - temporal father
Davidic Servant - temporal savior

The Melchizedek would represent the Spiritual roles while the Levitical would represent the temporal roles. D&C 85 is a great point there - thank you.

KingZulqarnayn
Hi, I'm new.
Posts: 3

Re: Spencer is the OMS???

Post by KingZulqarnayn »

Yeah, but theres still that fact he claims to be neighbouring real close with the Lord and yes im very aware of the Davidic servant (also known as David the Prince) but the Davidic servant is a prophet not a servant of the prophet. Thats what im wondering. Its possible that the OMS is multiple people just how Julie Rowe claims there are multiple Davidic kings....

User avatar
Alaris
Captain of 144,000
Posts: 7354
Location: Present before the general assembly
Contact:

Re: Spencer is the OMS???

Post by Alaris »

KingZulqarnayn wrote: February 16th, 2018, 10:27 am Yeah, but theres still that fact he claims to be neighbouring real close with the Lord and yes im very aware of the Davidic servant (also known as David the Prince) but the Davidic servant is a prophet not a servant of the prophet. Thats what im wondering. Its possible that the OMS is multiple people just how Julie Rowe claims there are multiple Davidic kings....
I suggest reading through Isaiah, in particular chapters 41 through 63. This is a man with both a unique path and a unique relationship with the Lord. Gileadis site has great commentary as well.

Isaiahexplained.com

Post Reply